General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Non-violent tactics and moral high-ground [View all]summer_in_TX
(2,788 posts)Plenty of conservatives aren't evil and can be awakened.
I will say that Gandhi was not at all sure the tactics of nonviolence would work against Hitler and the Nazi regime. I'm not sure it would work against a Twitler if he had consolidated power and had the hold on society and the media that Hitler had at the time of which Gandi was speaking.
This is the time to arouse the conscience of the sleeping conservatives and the apolitical who haven't been paying attention.
Which is why I advocate for the tactics of nonviolence now. In a political action.
I personally don't see any inconsistency with defending yourself and your family against a violent attack in your own home. That's not a political setting and in that situation you would not be trying to communicate to the world about the righteousness of the cause and your character while setting out the contrast with the white supremacists to the media and a wide audience. Besides the human instinct to defend yourself and your family, you arguably have a responsibility to protect them.
Those who stood with King underwent intense training and role-playing to be able to maintain their nonviolent response in the face of the white supremacist authoritarians of their day, Bull Connor, Lester Maddox, George Wallace, etc.
This is the 40th anniversary of India gaining its independence and NPR has had a number of pieces about it. One of the most moving was an interview with the British grandson of the man who ordered a massacre of Indians. He had gone to India and forced himself to visit the places where his grandfather had brutally had so many murdered. One person he talked to was Gandhi's grandson. When the Brit tried to apologize profusely, Gandhi's grandson said he was thankful for the incident, because after that people were very clear on where evil was and that was greatly helpful in overcoming the British and India regaining its freedom.